In , Leontief conducted an empirical test of the H-O theory by applying his In other words, the country resorts to foreign trade in order to economise its. This result has come to be known as the Leontief Paradox. The HO theory generally explains the trade patterns during the post war periods, say РLeontief Paradox: Wassily Leontief: also is known for the “Leontief Paradox. In international trade: Factor endowments: the Heckscher-Ohlin theory.

Author: Tohn Kigashura
Country: Botswana
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Marketing
Published (Last): 1 August 2018
Pages: 150
PDF File Size: 10.1 Mb
ePub File Size: 9.13 Mb
ISBN: 418-4-20651-567-7
Downloads: 14903
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Zulkilkree

However, Leontief found very few believers among economists.

Leontief paradox – Wikipedia

Specifically, a lower interest results in a greater amount of human capital in the export sector. S exports was far lower than expected, given the Paradoz.

By bringing a third factor, in to account in this way, possible explanation might be found. Tariffs and transport costs tend to reduce the volume of trade, but not reverse the pattern of trade. The Leontief Paradox evoked a infernational response from academicians. Learner expressed the view that Leontief paradox would fail when the country had trade imbalance.

Leontief Paradox Theory (An Overview)

These products were imported because the U. Three positions of bull-leaping sports. Some explanations for the paradox dismiss the importance of comparative advantage as a determinant of trade. With a trade surplus, a capital-abundant country such as the US may not only export the capital- intensive goods but also the labor-intensive goods.

Assume that the import-competing industry uses capital and natural resources in fixed proportions, i. Harvard University Press, East Germany was relatively more capital-abundant than the latter.


Thus a capital- abundant country would have a bias in flavor of capital-intensive goods that could prevail over its factor abundance. Suppose now that the US is maintaining a large trade surplus.

In brief, capital-abundant countries export labour- intensive goods and labour-abundant countries export capital-intensive goods. Thus, FIR is not important empirically, and is not likely to have been responsible for the LP in Pearson Addison Wesley, He then calculated the effects on capital and labour ;aradox of a given reduction in both U. Note internationao this increased effectiveness of the American workers was not due to a higher capital-labor ratio, because we assume that countries have identical technologies and hence identical capital- labor ratios.

First, the US may have been abundant in skilled labor. InLeontief conducted an empirical test of the H-O theory by applying his input- output technique on American trade data of In reality, even if technology advances allowed a decline in costs, it seems erroneous to assume that they are zero. The paradox was attacked by Valvaris-Vail on the ground that it was based on the input-output table showing the fixed input-output co-efficients.

But the multiple of three, as assumed by Leontief was clearly arbitrary. Moreover, there wasn’t any technique to test the HO theory until the input-output analysis was invented. Japan was a labor-abundant country, but exported capital-intensive goods and imported labor- intensive goods.

The Leontief Paradox to Heckscher-Ohlin Theory | Economics

Human capital has not been taken into account in evaluating LP. Static theories such tfade the factor price equalization theorem or the H. Such situations make it difficult to assess the validity or otherwise of H-O theorem.

However, if the Hecksher-Ohlin theorem is valid, then within each industry, commodities exported by the U. S trade were instead consistent with the H-O theory.


Per capita consumption of chocolates is less than 5 pounds in the United States. Appearing highly paradoxical, this result is subject to a range of criticisms. This year was very close to the period of Second World War Many economists have dismissed the H-O theory in favour of a more Ricardian model where technological differences determine comparative advantage.

Cailler Swiss Chocolate is the oldest brand of Swiss chocolate still in existence, and Switzerland leads the world in per capita annual chocolate consumption, A study attempted by Tatemato and Ichimura concerning Japan has confirmed the Leontief paradox.

It also ignores the fact that some trade-items are intensive in natural resources. It is true that this test is indirect, because technology differences have not so far been recognised as the basis for trade, but still the relative comparative advantages of different countries may be influenced by the research and development expenditure.

The Leontief Paradox to Heckscher-Ohlin Theory | Economics

Internationxl pointed out that the United States had a trade surplus in and there was little evidence that exports were labour- intensive. He admitted that, capital being abundant and cheap in US, its import substitutes was expected to be more capital-intensive than its actual imports. Inthis net-export of indirect man-hours was equal to 1, man-years Casas et al. Journal of Political Economy, Vol.